Re: python2.7 as default: where are we? (Was: Bug#641207: ITP: ordereddict)

2011-09-11 Thread Stefano Rivera
Hi Luca (2011.09.11_23:38:35_+0200) > Would it be possible to draw a map of things still to finish before > attempting to switch default to 2.7? There are a couple of resources > already ([0] and [1]), are there other useful bits around? > > [0] http://bugs.debian.org/622279 > [1] http://release.d

Re: python2.7 as default: where are we? (Was: Bug#641207: ITP: ordereddict)

2011-09-11 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Luca Falavigna wrote: > Would it be possible to draw a map of things still to finish before > attempting to switch default to 2.7? There are a couple of resources > already ([0] and [1]), are there other useful bits around? The same as the release.d.o bug, but:

python2.7 as default: where are we? (Was: Bug#641207: ITP: ordereddict)

2011-09-11 Thread Luca Falavigna
Il 11/09/2011 19:24, Jakub Wilk ha scritto: > To be honest, I don't expect Python 2.6 to go away any time soon. (For > the simple reason that apparently nobody works on making 2.7 the > default...) Would it be possible to draw a map of things still to finish before attempting to switch default to

Re: RFS: decibel-audio-player (Adoption, new upstream release)

2011-09-11 Thread Asheesh Laroia
Excerpts from Leonardo Marín's message of Sat Sep 10 15:42:54 -0400 2011: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "decibel-audio-player". > > * Package name : decibel-audio-player > Version : 1.07-1 > Upstream Author : Ingelrest Francois > * URL

Re: Package for multiple Python versions

2011-09-11 Thread Mitar
Hi! On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote: > That could be simplified to: > PYTHON_VERSION = $(shell pyversions -dv) Not really. Because I want to compile package for different versions of Python installed on the system I am passing PYTHON variable to make in each loop. So I have to

Re: Package for multiple Python versions

2011-09-11 Thread Christian Kastner
On 09/10/2011 11:18 PM, Mitar wrote: > Hi! > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Christian Kastner wrote: >> The reason for this is that your build environment affects the resulting >> binary package in various ways, one of them being the generated >> dependencies, which is why you are seeing str

Re: RFS: DPMT: flufl.lock 2.1.1-1

2011-09-11 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
[Piotr Ożarowski, 2011-09-11] > > >* flufl.lock-2.1.1-nspkg.pth is not really needed (I think I will add an > > > option to dh_python2 to remove .pth files, I cannot do that by > > > default, though) > > > > This is an artifact of `python setup.py install-egg-info`. Is it harmful to > > leave i

Re: Package for multiple Python versions

2011-09-11 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Mitar , 2011-09-11, 04:48: There are other problems with cmake Python support: http://bugs.debian.org/580503 I solved this by passing CMAKE_USE_PYTHON_VERSION parameter to cmake: PYTHON_VERSION = $(shell $(PYTHON) -c 'import sys; print "%s.%s" % sys.version_info[:2]') That could be simplif